Search for: "United States v. Detente"
Results 361 - 380
of 3,297
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
21 Aug 2008, 2:56 pm
United States v. [read post]
2 Oct 2008, 8:42 pm
States he feels a constant pinching pain, especially at night. [read post]
8 Sep 2009, 7:23 am
United States v. [read post]
20 Jul 2022, 4:00 am
The complaint (full text) in United States v. [read post]
24 Jun 2009, 10:29 am
United States v. [read post]
7 Mar 2016, 8:07 am
The United States Supreme Court recently issued a new decision, Montgomery v. [read post]
19 May 2010, 4:23 pm
This week’s alerts included several important decisions, such as: United States v. [read post]
13 Jul 2023, 8:53 am
Texas about and how does this decision affect non-citizens in the United States? [read post]
5 Dec 2008, 5:58 pm
The question at issue is: “Does the Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF), 115 Stat. 224, authorize — and if so does the Constitution allow — the seizure and indefinite military detention of a person lawfully residing in the United States, without criminal charge or trial, based on government assertions that the detainee conspired with al Qaeda to engage in terrorist activities? [read post]
19 Dec 2007, 4:23 am
United States v. [read post]
6 Jun 2012, 8:18 am
United States v. [read post]
29 Nov 2012, 5:34 pm
* * * Although detention in each context occurs under different legal authorities and with different purposes, immigration detention, jails, and prisons together comprise the broader system of mass incarceration in the United States and as such must contend with related concerns. [read post]
24 Apr 2007, 4:44 am
United States v. [read post]
10 Dec 2015, 8:39 am
[vi] United States Senate Historical office, http://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/minute/Church_Committee_Created.htm (accessed July 15, 2015). [read post]
20 Feb 2009, 6:49 am
United States v. [read post]
26 Apr 2009, 8:47 pm
United States v. [read post]
19 Sep 2011, 11:20 am
Judge Walton, Sullivan says, also never found that the petitioner raised a finger against the United States or its allies. [read post]
4 Apr 2012, 2:15 pm
The plaintiffs have two main arguments, which they summarize: The Act improperly authorizes that civilians in the United States be detained indefinitely by the military, that they be tried by military commission or military court and that they may be subject to removal to other jurisdictions in violation of the Amendments V and VI of the Constitution. [read post]
11 Jun 2007, 12:32 pm
For in the United States, the military cannot seize and imprison civilians -- let alone imprison them indefinitely.Al-Marri v. [read post]
18 Dec 2022, 5:35 pm
As the United States Supreme Court explained long ago in Hudson v. [read post]
